Jan Privat: It is quite expensive: $199
For $49, maybe. But not a single dollar more.FCPX is doing a pretty good job stabilizing footage, which you took with a little bit of care.
That's the price for one of the limited early bird solutions. The actual retail price is $349 which brings up this: what are they smoking?!
tkbslc: Considering most smartphone photos seem to be of people, using SS lower than 1/30 seem to be of little value. My guess is that, like regular cameras, the OIS will merely encourage less savvy photographers to create camera-steady photos with motion blur.
Be that as it may, instead of the whole picture becoming a blurry mess, with image stabilization you can have atleast a partly sharp picture. It matters. Then there's also more hope of getting the whole picture sharp.
I don't have data but I'm pretty sure handshake is a far greater image ruiner than motion blur. Though it's doubtful that these optical stablizations even allow really super long shutter times.
There's no negatives to this technology. Samsung may be a bit late to the game but bring it on! Every manufacturer.
SMSab: Ok for $450 its a pure hardcore RIP-OFF, the most reasonable price tag should be not more then $200 along with all the additional stuff.
Indeed, a bit of a shock really. While browsing through the review I thought I was looking at something that's in the 50 coin range locally and around 30 online. i.e. an impulse buy that's not a great loss if one only ends up using it once or twice.
Won't bother reading the review now. D'oh.
coffeefrog: fastest? version 8? I like what it does but fast is not how I would describe it.
This is quite near the point I'm most interested in: performance. LR4 can do pretty much all I want to do but it's a resource hog and sometimes stalls, wondering if DxO Optics is any better. FYI I run an average PC of Quad CPU / 8GB / 460GTX / SSD.
carpediem007: Again, still no support for the Ricoh GXR. :-(
Worse, STILL NO DNG support whatsoever. DNGs aren't even displayed in their "browser"...
And yes, I have been asking them for GXR / DNG support since version 3 or 4. :-(
Now I don't have this software but here's a quote from the first chapter: "... and the ability to batch process your camera's native raw files into TIFF, JPEG and DNG file formats."
If it can batch raw files into DNG, I would expect it to be able to show DNG files as well.
"Like many panorama apps, Photo Sphere struggles with moving subjects in the frame."
Uh, what on earth were you expecting when you shot that? That's a 100% user error and it did an excellent job at handling it.
Octane: Firmware can not change the physical design of the AF system. Most cameras did AF ok in some situations at one f-stop beyond the official limit, nothing new. It's not a matter of software/firmware, it's a matter of physical design. The AF sensors are designed to only see the light from a certain aperture. IOW, an AF sensor that is designed to see at f/2.8 will not see more with a 1.4 lens, nor does it get more light. Of course it will work with a faster lens, but when it comes to slower lenses it's more a matter of generous tolerances. This firmware update can only allow for some more tolerance, it can't change the design. The AF system was not designed to work at f/8, like for example Nikon did for the D4. Of course that didn't sit well with Canon so they are pushing it now to match it. Real life will show how well it actually works.
Octane, happen to have s source for this claim or is it just fanboy banter?
For Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 you state that "While the display isn’t HD like the Nexus 7..."; what is your definition for HD? Both displays have the same amount of pixels(which is the most common definition) so it's either pixel density or that the manufacturer markets it with HD-title.
VivaLasVegas: Holy smokes.....a built-in wifi+GPS tagging that is accessible via cellphones. Damn this is sooo futuristic! D600 can tooo, but it'll COST you $$$$ and it's stuffing is hanging out of its body like x-mas lights......just ugly.
6D=Apple lookD600=Android look
Bamboojled, source for 8?
D600 wins but in fairness 6D's list is missing a few:
3) 6D's center point works in -3EV whereas D600's CP only works in -1EV4) 6D ISO 100-25600 (exp. 50-102k) vs D600 100-6400 (exp. 50-25600)5) Less weight6) Travel friendly body7) 1,5% larger viewfinder magnification ;)8) Sharper screen 104k vs 92k9) Smaller resolution SRAW / MRAW options10) More magnesium alloy11) Build in Japan instead of Thailand
But this is silly.
Gothmoth: compare this shoot to the 6D sample shoots and begin to cry (when you are a canon user):
nikon win hands down.. i correct myself for 1599$ the 6D would be no good but a decent buy.
Ah yes, random promotional pics from the manufacturers product page. Always a good and professional way to reliably compare picture quality.
IRay808: Its sad to know that all the guys that wanna jump from the 7D to the 6D have to invest all there moneys into FF lenses now since Canon Full Frame Cameras don't have a crop mode. n downgrading from CF to SD? no dual slot? I shoot Nikon, but it must be devastating for all you Canon shooters to see a so called upgrade like this and for a price that is $99 more than their main rival..
The bodies are for different uses. In some aspects the 7D is better and in some the 6D.
If the sensor isn't "up to par" then it's a dud but that's not out yet.
Michael Todd: "To distinguish it from the more expensive 5D Mark III, the 6D features a simpler, 11-point AF system with a single cross-type focus sensor." Rubbish. Back to only focusing with the center AF point? I always said the 40D/50D had better AF than the 5D 2, now the 6D has joined the substandard AF club.
The 6D's center point is suppose to work in low light conditions but I hear you, it's an inferior system overall. The asking price is too much but that's just an excuse for great discounts. Or so I'm hoping for :)
Balooziggy: I am a Canon user for many years, currently I have a 5DMKII & 7D and seriously looking at the 1DX, with several lenses & accessories and I do NOT get the Canon model strategy given this announcement? The flagship 1DX is now 18MP FF, the 5DMKIII is 22MP FF, the 6D now fits between them and also FF, the 7D however is APS-C and 18MP, all these cameras except the 6D use CF Cards, so why has Canon done this on their so called Pro line-up ?D Range? Very Odd. The Canon Single Digit D range should have consistent standards throughout, that would make it far more attractive to both Pro's and avid amateur's alike to further invest in it's lineup, at the moment I must say, I think Nikon have a better road map and strategy for their product lineup and a better story to tell in general. I am disappointed with Canon's recent announcements and am now starting to wonder whether it's time to move on to something else.
Are you referring to pixel count? As in a higher model should have more pixels defacto. I'd rather look at the whole picture because that reveals what the camera can do. The bodies have different uses based on their attributes i.e. sensor size, af, speed, etc.
Anyways, I actually think that's kind of where Nikon's line up gets a bit mixed. The D800 has a lot of bells and whistles but then someone got a bit over excited about pixels and those little buggers dragged down its performance. It's slower than this Canon. Ok, then comes D600, a little dumbed down camera that's suppose to be an entry level FF DSLR but what seems to be a more versatile shooter than the D800.
lensberg: I wish Canon had implemented a superior AF system... perhaps something along the lines of a 7D AF module - 19 points... including all 19 cross type sensors... especially considering the asking price...
And... 4.5 frames per second...?! If the D600 is 1.5 FPS faster than the top of the line D800 ... and costs the same as the 6D ... is it asking too much to have a faster frame rate... at least on par with the 5D III at 6 FPS...
The IQ better be out of this world... at both extended high ISO settings as well DR ...
If it did all this, what purpose would 5D3 serve?
Could you show the shot that we're suppose to compare it to?
Unum sed Leonem: Why hasn't the 5D III built-in GPS and WiFi, for Goodness' sake! Does Canon assume one will buy a 5D III for all of its advantages and a 6D for the couple of 6D-specific features missing in the more expensive 5D III? How idiotic! This is one reason I'm seriously reconsidering my former plan of upgrading to 5D III (from 5D II). Intentionally excluding features from 'higher=end" cameras and including them in lower-end ones a few months later is entirely unacceptable. So, thank you, Canon. No 5D III for me. I'll wait for its successor, hoping for a better sensor, integrated high-sensitivity GPS chip, Wi-Fi, faster flash sync speeds, resolution of the rolling shutter issue, integrated flash, external flash firing (radio, not IR!) capability without a need of add-ons, proper waterproofing. If not, than bye-bye, Canon…
The preview states that 6D's top plate is polycarbonate for wifi and GPS signals. Think about the outcry if 5D3's body hadn't been all magnesium alloy, even if that polycarbonate plate is as strong and rigid as magnesium alloy. You'll have to buy a dongle.